[jms698]

s/n: 9010305

(probably the earliest serial number of all the lenses listed here; bought from Photography and Electronics Stores - We are experts in all the products we sell. )

good! slightly soft at the corners at f/2.8, but otherwise excellent throughout on the K20d.

[Beau]

9021501 -- seems to be good at first sight, a bit soft wide open at 16mm in the corners. Bought at fotokonijnenberg, turnhout, belgium.

Seems like the newer 902... serials are all good up to now.

update
--------

I uploaded some testshots. Could someone with a good copy take a look and tell me if I got a good one?
Picasa Web Albums - Beau - DA* 16-50 f2....

[Reuben0]

Seems like the newer 902... serials are all good up to now.

??? That's not what I would conclude reading back through the posts...

R

[Beau]

??? That's not what I would conclude reading back through the posts...

R

You are correct, some bad 902s are reported in the later pages.

[GoSharks]

9018278 from Beach Camera (6/13) seems good so far, apart from a little stickiness in the zoom action at 28mm going from 16->50.

[kokanee]

Hi fellow pentaxians,
as it seems is my lens a good one. It's somewhat soft on the edges at f2.8, but generally I'm happy with it.
SN: 9014560
Greetings from southern Bavaria,
Peter

[Prognathous]

Updated list:

9010305 - GOOD
9011024 - GOOD
9011133 - GOOD - used from a forum member
9011582 - GOOD - from Amazon
9011592 - GOOD - from Digital Depot
9012114 - GOOD -
9012269 - GOOD - from a Pentax retailer in Helsinkiin October
9012537 - GOOD -
9012359 - GOOD - bought locally
9012509 - GOOD
9012541 - BAD - from Amazon, beginning of January
9012612 - BAD - from Keeble and Shuchat in Palo Alto, CA (focus is fine, but suffered mechanical failure)
9013067 - GOOD
9013124 - BAD
9013251 - GOOD
9013254 - BAD
9013269 - GOOD - from ACE Photo - Northern Virginia
9013490 - BAD - aperture problem
9014xxx - BAD - slight de-centering and trouble focussing at 50mm (Reuben0)
9014376 - BAD - back focus
9014560 - GOOD
9014888 - GOOD
9015311 - BAD
9015662 - GOOD - from National Camera and Video, Edina, MN.
9015921 - BAD - from a hometown store
9016333 - BAD
90163xx - BAD - reported by daacon
9016410 - GOOD - from CameraWarehouse.com.au
9016499 - GOOD
9016508 - GOOD
9016577 - GOOD - from Henry's
9016531 - GOOD
9016652 - GOOD - from McBain Camera
9016761 - BAD
9017115 - GOOD
9017198 - GOOD - purchased in Vancouver, Canada
9017292 - BAD - from B&H
9017473 - GOOD - from a local store in Canada
9017525 - BAD - So it's a BAD copy on K10D, but a GOOD one on K20D
9017549 - GOOD - from Digit-Photo in December
9017856 - GOOD
9018018 - BAD - from Amazon (new, first owner)
9018018 - GOOD - from Amazon (refurbished, second owner - fixed by Pentax?)
9018137 - BAD - from Amazon03-17-2008
9018176 - BAD - from Adorama
9018278 - GOOD - from Beach Camera
9018380 - BAD - from B&H
9018546 - GOOD
9018897 - BAD - from Amazon (now that Pentax fixed it, it's GOOD)
9018946 - GOOD -
9019078 - BAD - from Adorama (not very good, focus at 16/2.8 unreliable)
9019218 - GOOD - from Adorama
9019284 - GOOD - from Adorama
9019306 - BAD - purchased in Vancouver, Canada.
9019329 - GOOD - from Adorama
9019346 - BAD - from Willoughby's (originally reported as good, but now refuses to focus)
9019612 - GOOD
9019818 - GOOD
9020266 - GOOD
9021116 - GOOD - from B&H (focusing may be "a tad off")
9021117 - GOOD
9021232 - GOOD - from Willoughby's
9021501 - GOOD - from fotokonijnenberg, Turnhout, Belgium.
9022439 - GOOD - from Calumet NYC
9023236 - GOOD - from SRS Microsystems
90233xx - BAD - total rubbish in the corners unless stopped down to F16 (Reuben0)
9023463 - GOOD - from buydig
90244xx - BAD - corner softness, tested briefly in the shop (Reuben0)
9024876 - BAD

Prog.

[milans]

Bought today 9020323 in Fotobesenicar - Slovenia for now looks good I hope also in the future...

[sinus007]

9021570 is OK. Bought it from Beachcamera a week ago. Did a few crude tests.

[morfic]

Thanks Prognathous.

Any more nicks to the Bad lenses? or is Reuben0 the only "unlucky" guy?

When people repeatedly find "bad lenses" i wonder if it says more about the lenses or the users.

[iunknown]

9018278 from Beach Camera (6/13) seems good so far, apart from a little stickiness in the zoom action at 28mm going from 16->50.

I have experienced the same situation. The lens seems to be good so far. There is some stickness (a little) near 28mm. I bought this lens from B&H. My previous one from Abes Of Maine was bad and I had to return it. The serial number is 9025709

One thing I noted is this serial number seems to be from the 2008 batch and my previous 16-50 got from Abes was 2007 batch..

-IU

[thear]

Update

9013490

Received the lens from repairs a week ago, problem has been fixed. I did not perform a thorough IQ test yet.

[fishy]

9029381, received just today from Adorama.
Not too sure. Focus is lovely quiet, but it seems soft @ 2.8. Can anyone with a good lens post a sample? here's one (K10D):
100iso, 2.8, 1/50, 50mm (100% crop).
@16 it is noticeably better. What do you guys think?

[jsherman999]

That's a 100% crop? Can we see the full image?

Note that @ 50mm + f/2.8 is this lens's weakest spot - Need to see the whole image,
but I'm thinking it's probably OK. Especially for a 100% crop...

[fishy]

Sorry, my bad, was no 100%. Misread dimensions...

But I think you're right. I also have a really soft Sigma 28-70 2.8, but I don't use it anymore. Maybe I'm too careful (or worried, it'd be hell to send it back to the States)
Next try (image converted from RAW, no sharpening):
Focus is on the grey-ish book, 'Ethica' for the top, 'Dover' on the bottom crop
Top: Center-center, Bottom: center-bottom

The girl was taken @ 50mm, 1/100, iso 100, the eye is a 100% crop (really, this time)

So where shall I put 9029381? Good or bad? I'm still not decided